Challenges to building a disaster-resilient nation

The deadly typhoon that struck
Burma in early May and the devastating earthquake that struck
China a week later carried with
them echoes of the devastation wrought
by the Sumatra earthquake and tsunami
on the Indian Ocean region in 2004. In
the United States, the vulnerability of
Burma’s coastal populations to severe
winds and storm-surge inundation also
served to remind us of Hurricane Katrina
and the ongoing recovery in New Orleans
and other Gulf Coast communities.
Although U.S. cities have not experienced
a catastrophic earthquake since the one
in Anchorage, Alaska, in 1964, we know
that events as large as the Chinese earthquake will strike in the future.

Extreme events are facts of life on an
active planet like ours. How those events
affect us reflects not only the power of
nature but the decisions we make in how
we build our societies. Achieving security at home and abroad must reflect an
overall resilience to all hazards that confront our communities. Achieving that
resilience is a grand challenge, and it will
take the collective action of government
at all levels, nonprofit organizations, the
private sector and above all individuals
trying to do what is best for themselves,
their families and their communities.

Science and technology can play
a critical role in the quest for disaster
resilience. To better define this role,
the National Science and Technology
Council’s Subcommittee on Disaster
Reduction, representing 22 federal
departments and agencies, identified six
grand challenges for disaster reduction.

The first of these challenges is to
provide hazard and disaster information
where and when it is needed. Meeting
this challenge requires robust monitoring systems with the capability to reach
those in harm’s way and provide emergency responders with the information
they need. Such systems are only as good
as their weakest link, which in many

cases is the link to the people at risk.
Improving communications to the most
vulnerable populations, so that they can
protect themselves, requires education.

The second challenge is to understand the natural processes that produce
hazards. Targeted research
can harness advances in
computing power and
draw upon data generated
by global observational
systems to improve predic-tive modeling. For coastal
hazards, this understanding must include assessment of the impacts of
climate change on coastal
inundation.

The third challenge is
to develop strategies and
technologies to reduce the
impact of extreme events
on the built environment
and vulnerable ecosystems. Meeting this challenge will require
understanding social, cultural and economic factors that promote or inhibit
promising mitigation technologies.

The fourth grand challenge is to
reduce the vulnerability of infrastructure. One major obstacle to recovery in
any disaster is the delayed restoration of
critical infrastructure such as drinking
water, electricity and gas distribution
systems. A key step is establishing the
technical basis for revised codes and
standards for critical infrastructure.
Paradoxically, advances in technology can increase society’s vulnerability
because of reliance on distant resources
and just-in-time inventory delivery, with
the result that the economic impact of a
natural hazard event can be broader than
its storm track or rupture zone.

The fifth challenge is to develop standardized methods for communities to
measure and assess disaster resilience
across multiple hazards. A key step is
developing and distributing assessment

tools that can be used to set priorities.

The final challenge is to promoterisk-wise behavior. The costs of naturaldisasters are rising as people increas-ingly move into harm’s way in low-lyingcoastal areas, the wildland-urban inter-face and geologically activeregions. In order to achieve“hazards literacy” and sus-tained risk reduction, haz-ards must be real to people.Scenarios are a tool thatcan spell out the impacts oflikely events on high-riskareas, combining scientificand engineering knowl-edge with local planningand emergency manage-ment expertise to deliver acomprehensive picture ofpotential losses.

The subcommittee has
released plans identifying
the priority science and

technology actions needed to meet these
challenges for all major hazards. These
plans will help to shape sustained federal
science and technology investments in
disaster reduction and can also serve as a
blueprint for international cooperation.

All the plans identify the same
desired outcomes: A nation where relevant hazards are recognized and understood, communities at risk know when
a hazard event is imminent, individuals
can live safely in the context of our planet’s extreme events and communities
experience minimum disruption to life
and economy after a hazard event. ■

Science andtechnology canplay a criticalrole in the questfor disasterresilience.

David Applegate is chair of the National
Science and Technology Council’s Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction and senior
science adviser for earthquake and geologic
hazards at the U.S. Geological Survey. The
Grand Challenges for Disaster Reduction
and accompanying implementation plans
are available at www.sdr.gov. Applegate can
be reached at applegate@usgs.gov.